The constitutional power to make war: domestic legal issues raised by Australia's action in Iraq

The legal power to declare war has traditionally been a part of a prerogative to be exercised solely on advice that passed from the King to the Governor-General no later than 1942. In 2003, the Governor- General was not involved in the decision by the Prime Minister and Cabinet to commit Australian troops to the invasion of Iraq. The authors explore the alternative legal means by which Australia can go to war - means the government in fact used in 2003 - and the constitutional basis of those means. While the prerogative power can be regulated and/or devolved by legislation, and just possibly by practice, there does not seem to be a sound legal basis to assert that the power has been devolved to any other person. It appears that in 2003 the Defence Minister used his legal powers under the Defence Act 1903 (Cth) (as amended in 1975) to give instructions to the service head(s). A powerful argument could be made that the relevant sections of the Defence Act were not intended to be used for the decision to go to war, and that such instructions are for peacetime or in bello decisions. If so, the power to make war remains within the prerogative to be exercised on advice. Interviews with the then Governor-General indicate that Prime Minister Howard had planned to take the matter to the Federal Executive Council 'for noting', but did not do so after the Governor-General sought the views of the then Attorney-General about relevant issues of international law. The exchange raises many issues, but those of interest concern the kinds of questions the Governor-General could and should ask about proposed international action and whether they in any way mirror the assurances that are uncontroversially required for domestic action. In 2003, the Governor-General's scrutiny was the only independent scrutiny available because the legality of the decision to go to war was not a matter that could be determined in the High Court, and the federal government had taken action in March 2002 that effectively prevented the matter coming before the International Court of Justice

An assessment of the potential of family day care as a nutrition promotion setting in South Australia

Articles > Journals > Health journals > Nutrition & Dietetics: The Journal of the Dieticians Association of Australia articles > March 2003 Article: An assessment of the potential of Family Day Care as a nutrition promotion setting in South Australia. (Original Research). Article from:Nutrition & Dietetics: The Journal of the Dieticians Association of Australia Article date:March 1, 2003 Author:Daniels, Lynne A.; Franco, Bunny; McWhinnie, Julie-Anne CopyrightCOPYRIGHT 2006 Dietitians Association of Australia. This material is published under license from the publisher through the Gale Group, Farmington Hills, Michigan. All inquiries regarding rights or concerns about this content should be directed to customer service. (Hide copyright information) Related articles Ads by Google TAFE Child Care Courses Government accredited courses. Study anytime, anywhere. www.seeklearning.com.au Get Work in Child Care Certificate III Children's Services 4 Day Course + Take Home Assessment HBAconsult.com.au Abstract Objective: To assess the potential role of Family Day Care in nutrition promotion for preschool children. Design and setting: A questionnaire to examine nutrition-related issues and practices was mailed to care providers registered in the southern region of Adelaide, South Australia. Care providers also supplied a descriptive, qualitative recall of the food provided by parents or themselves to each child less than five years of age in their care on the day closest to completion of the questionnaire. Subjects: 255 care providers. The response rate was 63% and covered 643 preschool children, mean 4.6 (SD 2.8) children per carer. Results: There was clear agreement that nutrition promotion was a relevant issue for Family Day Care providers. Nutrition and food hygiene knowledge was good but only 54% of respondents felt confident to address food quality issues with parents. Sixty-five percent of respondents reported non-neutral approaches to food refusal and dawdling (reward, punishment, cajoling) that overrode the child's control of the amount eaten. The food recalls indicated that most children (> 75%) were offered fruit at least once. Depending on the hours in care, (0 to 4, 5 to 8, greater than 8 hours), 20%, 32% and 55%, respectively, of children were offered milk and 65%, 82% and 87%, respectively, of children were offered high fat and sugar foods. Conclusions: Questionnaire responses suggest that many care providers are committed to and proactive in a range of nutrition promotion activities. There is scope for strengthening skills in the management of common problems, such as food refusal and dawdling, consistent with the current evidence for approaches to early feeding management that promote the development of healthy food preferences and eating patterns. Legitimising and empowering care providers in their nutrition promotion role requires clear policies, guide lines, adequate pre- and in-service training, suitable parent materials, and monitoring.

Structural health monitoring in Australia

Structural Health Monitoring (SHM) is defined as the use of on-structure sensing system to monitor the performance of the structure and evaluate its health state. Recent bridge failures, such as the collapses of the 1-35W Highway Bridge in USA, the collapse of the Can Tho Bridge in Vietnam and the Xijiang River Bridge in the Mainland China, all of which happened in the year 2007, have alerted the importance of structural health monitoring. This book presents a background of SHM technologies together with its latest development and successful applications. It is a book launched to celebrate the establishment of the Australian Network of Structural Health Monitoring (ANSHM). The network comprising leading SHM experts in Australia promotes and advances SHM research, application, education and development in Australia.

Structural health monitoring for long span bridges : Hong Kong experience and continuing onto Australia

Structural health monitoring has been accepted as a justified effort for long-span bridges, which are critical to a region's economic vitality. As the most heavily instrumented bridge project in the world, WASHMS - Wind And Structural Health Monitoring System has been developed and installed on the cable-supported bridges in Hong Kong (Wong and Ni 2009a). This chapter aims to share some of the experience gained through the operations and studies on the application of WASHMS. It is concluded that Structural Health Monitoring should be composed of two main components: Structural Performance Monitoring (SPM) and Structural Safety Evaluation (SSE). As an example to illustrate how the WASHMS could be used for structural performance monitoring, the layout of the sensory system installed on the Tsing Ma Bridge is briefly described. To demonstrate the two broad approaches of structural safety evaluation - Structural Health Assessment and Damage Detection, three examples in the application of SHM information are presented. These three examples can be considered as pioneer works for the research and development of the structural diagnosis and prognosis tools required by the structural health monitoring for monitoring and evaluation applications.